ALISON J. NATHAN
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judge defendant |
54
Very Strong
|
90 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
24
Very Strong
|
33 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
21
Very Strong
|
66 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
19
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
40 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
46 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Judicial |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Judicial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Paula Speer
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
AUDREY STRAUSS
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
U.S. government
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Prosecutor judge |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial authority |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial assignment |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
United States Government
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judge defendant |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Judge defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
None |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Professional |
6
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court proceeding | Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell will move the Court for an Order regarding jury selection procedures. | United States Courthouse at... | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | The court denied the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on the current record, but consente... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Sentencing hearing | The document pertains to procedures for victims to speak at an upcoming sentencing hearing for Gh... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Proposed meeting | Request for an in camera conference to discuss filing procedures for the bail motion. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | Ongoing criminal case, Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, against Ms. Maxwell. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A four-and-a-half-week jury trial for Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A thirteen-day trial was held for Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Sentencing | A future sentencing hearing is planned, which victims Kate and Annie intend to attend. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | The court denied the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on the current record but consented... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Upcoming pre-trial proceedings and trial for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Ma... | courthouse | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The ongoing criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States Courthouse, 4... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Ms. Maxwell's sentencing hearing, during which Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein have requested t... | United States District Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The Court granted the request for Annie Farmer, Kate, and/or Virginia Giuffre to make oral statem... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The District Court imposed concurrent terms of imprisonment of 60 months, 120 months, and 240 mon... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | A court hearing is mentioned where Virginia Giuffre was expected to be present to give a statement. | courtroom | View |
| 2025-11-18 | N/A | Charging conference | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-22 | Court filing | Transcript of Proceedings for the sentencing held on 6/28/2022 was filed. | SDNY Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court filing | Transcript of Proceedings for the trial held on 12/29/21 was filed. | SDNY Court | View |
| 2022-06-29 | N/A | Judgment of conviction entered following a four-and-a-half-week jury trial. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Judgment of conviction for Ghislaine Maxwell. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Judgment in a criminal case was imposed and filed for Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | A judgment of conviction was entered against Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal judgment | A judgment was entered in the action against Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Ghislaine Maxwell's judgment of conviction was entered in the United States District Court for th... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | N/A | Imposition of Judgment | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00005263.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated October 18, 2021, from attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan on behalf of his client, Ms. Maxwell. Pagliuca argues that due to recent government disclosures and a cumbersome two-step file encryption process implemented by the government, there has been insufficient time to meet the deadline for filing motions *in limine*. Citing a previous court order, he reserves the right for the defense to file additional or supplemental motions after the deadline has passed.
DOJ-OGR-00005262.jpg
This document is page 3 of a legal filing dated October 18, 2021, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues they have received voluminous discovery materials (over 14,000 pages) from the government very recently (Oct 11-12), leaving insufficient time to review them before filing motions in limine. The document details the logistics of the hard drive deliveries to counsel in New York and Colorado, and to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC, while noting that some materials provided to Maxwell were incomplete.
DOJ-OGR-00005261.jpg
This document is a legal filing detailing a defense team's motions in limine to exclude specific evidence, testimony, and terminology (including references to Jeffrey Epstein and characterizing accusers as "victims") in a criminal case. It also outlines procedures for temporary sealing of confidential discovery materials and reserves the right to file additional motions.
DOJ-OGR-00005255.jpg
This document is a letter dated October 18, 2021, from defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Sternheim argues for the necessity of individual, sequestered, and counsel-conducted voir dire (jury selection), citing the extraordinary public exposure of the case, evidenced by millions of Google search results for Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. The letter contends that this special procedure is required to eliminate biased jurors and ensure a fair trial, countering the government's standard opposition to such methods.
DOJ-OGR-00005246.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated October 15, 2021. It discusses the scheduling of motions related to Federal Rule of Evidence 412, which governs the admissibility of evidence regarding a victim's sexual behavior. The document contains an endorsement by Judge Nathan ordering that such motions be filed by October 27, 2021, with responses due November 1, and a tentative hearing on November 5.
DOJ-OGR-00005245.jpg
This document is Page 3 of a legal filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), dated October 15, 2021. It contains a submission by the US Attorney's office followed by a 'SO ORDERED' endorsement from the Judge (Alison J. Nathan). The Judge denies a specific order requested by the defense but establishes a firm expectation that Maxwell should receive legal mail within approximately one business day to ensure she can prepare for trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005243.jpg
This document is a letter dated October 15, 2021, from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter addresses a complaint about legal mail delivery delays at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), detailing the specific administrative steps mail must go through (warehouse logging, legal department retrieval, internal tracking) before reaching an inmate. The government consulted with MDC legal counsel to explain these procedures to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00005241.jpg
This is a letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney, Bobbi C. Sternheim, to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated October 15, 2021. Sternheim complains that the government's explanation for the severely delayed delivery of Maxwell's legal mail at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) is inadequate and hinders Maxwell's ability to prepare for trial. The letter argues that the MDC is capable of timely delivery, citing the extensive resources used to monitor Maxwell, and criticizes the government's refusal to facilitate special delivery for evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00005237.jpg
This document is a letter filed on October 15, 2021, by the U.S. Attorney's Office to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government is responding to a court order concerning the deadline for the defendant to file a motion under Federal Rule of Evidence 412, which governs the admissibility of evidence regarding a victim's sexual behavior. The document outlines the legal standards and purpose of Rule 412, emphasizing victim privacy protections.
DOJ-OGR-00005234.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Government to Judge Alison J. Nathan, filed on October 15, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter responds to a court order regarding the delivery of the defendant's legal mail at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The Government explains the standard procedures at the MDC, noting that mail from counsel is delivered within a business day, while mail from the Government sent via FedEx undergoes a more complex warehouse processing and logging system before reaching the inmate.
DOJ-OGR-00005233.jpg
This document is a court order issued on October 15, 2021, by U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order acknowledges the court's receipt of a letter from the defendant concerning the delivery of her legal mail at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The judge orders the Government to respond to the defendant's letter by 5:00 p.m. on the same day.
DOJ-OGR-00005232.jpg
This is a court order dated October 14, 2021, from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Judge Alison J. Nathan acknowledges receipt of a letter from the defendant regarding a motion under Federal Rule of Evidence 412 and orders the Government to respond by 5:00 p.m. on October 15, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00005229.jpg
A letter dated October 14, 2021, from defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan requesting a court order to compel the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) to deliver legal mail to Ghislaine Maxwell within 24 hours of receipt. Sternheim details specific incidents of delay, including a hard drive withheld for two days and legal mail deposited on October 2 that was not discovered until October 7. The letter also alleges potential evidence tampering, noting a 'questionable bar code sticker' found on legal mail that the MDC Unit Manager eventually returned to counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00005228.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated October 14, 2021, from attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter informs the court of the defense's intent to file a Rule 412 motion on behalf of Ms. Maxwell by November 15, 2021. It justifies this timeline by stating it is essential for counsel to adequately consult with their client and prepare the necessary legal research and procedures.
DOJ-OGR-00005227.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of Ms. Maxwell. The defense counsel argues against the government's proposed deadline for a Rule 412 motion, requesting more time to review over 8,000 pages of recently disclosed material and witness information. The defense asserts that a deadline before November 15 is unreasonable given the volume of new evidence and the defendant's custodial status.
DOJ-OGR-00005226.jpg
This document is a letter dated October 14, 2021, from attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan, confirming November 15, 2021, as the deadline for Ghislaine Maxwell to file a motion under Federal Rule of Evidence 412 concerning the admissibility of evidence of an alleged victim's sexual behavior, clarifying its distinction from a motion in limine and its specific procedural requirements.
DOJ-OGR-00005224.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York, filed on October 14, 2021. The order addresses the court's receipt of a letter from a victim's lawyer regarding trial attendance, stating it will be filed under seal and shared with counsel. It also outlines procedures for ensuring public, victim, and defendant's family access to the upcoming trial, providing contact information for coordination through the Victim Witness Unit and the District Executive's Office.
DOJ-OGR-00005223.jpg
This is a court order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated October 13, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Judge Alison J. Nathan acknowledges receipt of the defendant's motion for a specific type of jury selection (voir dire) and orders the Government to file a response by Monday, October 18, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00005205.jpg
This is a Notice of Motion filed on October 13, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense attorneys for Maxwell are formally notifying the court and prosecution of their intent to request a specific jury selection process, namely 'individual sequestered juror voir dire and limited counsel-conducted voir dire'. The motion is to be brought before Judge Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00005203.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated October 12, 2021, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. In response to a court order, the government estimates its case-in-chief will last approximately four weeks. The letter also confirms that the government has provided the defense with its exhibit list, witness list, and other required materials.
DOJ-OGR-00005201.jpg
A letter dated October 11, 2021, from the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter submits a joint proposed juror questionnaire and voir dire, noting specific disagreements marked in green and purple bubbles within the enclosed documents. The letter also conveys the defense's request to file these documents under seal to avoid media coverage that could prejudice jury selection, a request to which the Government consents.
DOJ-OGR-00005178.jpg
This document is a court order filed on October 5, 2021, by District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order establishes the trial schedule, noting that jury selection will conclude by November 19 and opening statements will begin on November 29. The Judge orders both parties to submit a joint letter by October 12, 2021, estimating the length of the trial to determine if proceedings will need to continue through the Christmas and New Year holidays.
DOJ-OGR-00002890.jpg
This legal document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated April 5, 2021, concerning the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecution requests that the court compel Maxwell's defense to share a copy of a proposed subpoena for records from the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, and to also share any documents produced as a result. The letter notes that the government has already provided over 2.7 million pages of discovery to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00002888.jpg
This document is a legal letter filed on April 5, 2021, by Laura A. Menninger, counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter requests a one-week continuance for the arraignment on the S2 Indictment, moving it from April 16 to April 23, 2021, due to a scheduling conflict in Colorado and ongoing evidence review. The letter notes that the government does not oppose the request and mentions that the delay would allow Maxwell's family time to arrange travel to attend.
Response Deadline
Order to respond to Defendant's letter by 5:00 p.m. on Oct 15, 2021.
Order on Redactions
Judge adopts proposed redactions for specific motions.
Order referenced as Dkt. No. 89
A previous court order from December 7, 2020, which the Defendant's filing was in accordance with.
Endorsement on Letter Motion
The Court sees no basis for sealing this letter. Defendant must justify sealing by Dec 2, 2020, or file publicly.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN
Legal arguments regarding 'The Material' and subpoena service issues.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity